- From: Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org>
- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:17:54 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
- CC: "RUST Randal" <RRust@COVANSYS.com>
well put, please advise if you need support. Regards Harry Ikhaya Internet Consulting mobile : +44 794 034 3919 ~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~ Good judgement comes from experience. Experience, of course, is the result of poor judgement. - Geoff Tabin ---------- Original Message ----------- From: "RUST Randal" <RRust@COVANSYS.com> To: "WAI" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:56:08 -0400 Subject: A Call to Reorganize WCAG 2.0 > I just sent the following message to the Working Group. It is, in my > opinion, what will be necessary in order for WCAG Guidelines to gain > wider acceptance by making them more practical to understand, implement > and test. > > ------------------------------------------- > > Based on several heated discussions that are currently going on over > on the WAI-IG list, and at the suggestion of David Pawson, I propose > the following: > > WCAG should be divided into Guidelines, which can > be measured and tested, and Suggested Best Practices, which > can only be tested by a person. > > The Guidelines should deal strictly with W3C Technologies, so that > vendors can be left to ensuring the accessibility of proprietary > technologies such as Shockwave and PDF. Vendor technologies can then > be addressed in the Suggested Best Practices. Other items, such as clarity > of content, should also move out of Guidelines. > > I propose this because WCAG Guidelines must be measurable and > quantifiable. There can be no gray areas, otherwise it makes it too > difficult to make a business case for accessibility. The measurable > Guidelines must work entirely in concert with other W3C publications, > such as HTML, XHTML, CSS and DOM. Moving outside of the W3C realm > only causes confustion, frustration and, ultimately, ignorance of > Accessibility Guidelines. > > The average developer can easily grasp HTML validation and its > results, but cannot easily understand the results of a BOBBY test. Accessibility > testing always results in ambiguous results that are confusing in > some aspects. All too often, the final decision on accessibility is > left up to human judgement -- which may or may not be accurate. > > In order for WCAG to gain greater acceptance, its Guidelines must be > quantifiable. Developers and designers must be able to validate their > pages and get clear-cut results, just like with HTML validation. > > If WCAG 2.0 is open to interpretation, then the W3C will only be adding > to the difficulty of developing accessible Web sites, not making it > easier. > > Thank you. > > ---------- > Randal Rust > Covansys Corp. > Columbus, OH ------- End of Original Message -------
Received on Monday, 23 August 2004 12:17:56 UTC